In the photo on the left, a gutter-hugging cyclist is truly in the wrong position in his lane. However, the passing automobile has pulled way to the left to pass, leaving the cyclist an abundance of "safe passing" space.
In the photo on the right, the cyclist is maintaining a better lane position, this time within the bike lane (are those double stripes?). Studies have shown that (timid) cyclists do indeed right farther from the curb in a bike lane than on a street without one. The same studies show that cars pass the cyclist closer, and at a higher speed, when there are bike lanes present.
If the cowering cyclist had been taught to ride at least 4 feet from the curb face, the overtaking car would still take their foot off the gas and pull out to pass, as opposed to squeezing past the cyclist without slowing down. Amazing how "bicycle advocates" could call a car changing lanes to safely pass a cyclist "over correcting", and yet these are some of the same folks crying over the failed "safe passing" law earlier this year that Gov. Perry vetoed. Perhaps they should have called it the "over-correcting" law instead.
So, who benefits from these segregated facilities? Bicyclists or automobile drivers? Clearly, it's the automobile drivers who benefit in the example shown here, and it's the bicyclists who are put at greater risk.
I see a tortilla, while the faithful of the Irving Bike Lane Task Force see the face of Elvis. And this passes for "bicycle advocacy".
Edit: Keri Caffrey of CommuteOrlando kindly posted this in the comments below. It deserves to be here where everyone can see it, as it perfectly illustrates the dynamic we are discussing. Elvis has left the building.
13 comments:
1. It is wishful thinking to assume that all motorists will be as generous as the one in the first photo when passing a cyclist. Many drivers will attempt to squeeze by without changing lanes.
2. Even if cars pass cyclists more closely when lanes are present, it doesn't necessarily follow that the cyclist has greater risk, or that there will be more bicycle/automobile crashes.
Reuben said...
1. It is wishful thinking to assume that all motorists will be as generous as the one in the first photo when passing a cyclist. Many drivers will attempt to squeeze by without changing lanes.
Not at all, if the cyclist learns to control his/her lane. As that photo, and the studies by TxDOT/UT, SCDOT, and in the UK all show, when there is no bike lane, the vast majority of motorists actually do pull out to the left when overtaking a cyclist. True, that cyclist is inviting the motorist to squeeze by him, and that style of riding is the direct cause of some of cycling's worst collisions.
2. Even if cars pass cyclists more closely when lanes are present, it doesn't necessarily follow that the cyclist has greater risk, or that there will be more bicycle/automobile crashes.
Closer, higher-speed passes are considerably riskier to the cyclist than (slightly) slower passes at a greater distance. The margin for error increase dramatically.
Watch the Cyclist View video in the right hand column of this site, or follow this URL: http://cycledallas.blogspot.com/2009/03/dallas-run-seven-fold-revelation.html
Tortilla. For sure. I see it plain as day, even without your useful notes. I sure wish "over correcting" was the order of the day... good post, man.
That bike line is obviously brand new. It's not loaded up with debris yet...
Reuben's comment about cars passing closely not representing a greater risk doesn't reflect the reality I've experienced. On roadways with bike lanes, drivers will operate at higher speeds when they pass, which means higher risk to me. I've also discovered that the white line means little to a driver reading a paper, or texting or... any number of distractions.
I saw a bumper sticker a long time ago: "Elvis is dead, get over it" and it appears to apply here, but the appropriate parties aren't yet over it.
Motorists don't benefit either. They're stuck in an inferior lane even if no cyclist is present. The cyclist is not truly gotten "off the road." The only real beneficiaries are those selling this stuff.
We need better advocates.
Reuben,
A gutter rider like the one in the photo must rely on the good graces of each motorist that passes.
An assertive rider will always (with the exception of rare, deliberate acts of aggression*) get more passing clearance claiming the lane than riding in the bike lane. See this video.
*In my experience rare acts of aggression occur no matter where in the lane a cyclist is riding. I've experienced purposeful buzzing while riding in a bike lane as well.
But more frighteningly, I've experienced many more close passes in a bike lane where I'm sure the motorist had simply tuned me out. In those cases the car has drifted toward me and even across the paint directly in front of me, then wandered back into its lane. The stripe allows motorists to disregard anything not directly in their lane. It is a facilitator of distracted driving, very much at our expense. We're seeing an abundance of crashes this year which reflect that.
http://www.cerevellum.com/
THIS might be interestingly useful to prove some points... Stealthy from the rear, recordable front and rear.
"THIS might be interestingly useful to prove some points... Stealthy from the rear, recordable front and rear."
Does it beep when I back up? ;-)
Gawd, I hope not! Email them with a request for that feature, though. I'm sure they'll accommodate!
PM's bike has reverse?! Must be a feature on that new electric Dura-Ace group.
Ignatius J. Reilly said...
"PM's bike has reverse?! Must be a feature on that new electric Dura-Ace group."
Reverse comes standard on all Retro-Grouchcycles.
As for Dura-Ace... the only things that "click" on my bikes are the spokes (sometimes).
Post a Comment